How evidence of a gene-environment interaction impacts sentencing decisions

What is it about?

This research examined how mitigation evidence presented by the defense [genetic evidence (the low-activity MAOA gene, which has been shown to increase the likelihood of violent behavior), environmental evidence (child maltreatment), genetic and environmental evidence (the G × E condition), or a control condition] and evidence presented by the prosecution (a low or high risk of future dangerousness) impacts jurors' and juries' sentencing decisions in a death penalty case.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

Research has shown that the low‐activity MAOA genotype in conjunction with a history of childhood maltreatment increases the likelihood of violent behaviors. This genetic–environment (G × E) interaction has been introduced as mitigation during the sentencing phase of capital trials, yet there is scant data on its effectiveness. The purpose of this research was to better understand the impact of this particular combination of evidence on jurors' sentencing decisions, and, in turn, inform questions surrounding whether it will function as intended (i.e., as mitigation).